ArticlePediatric surgery international2023
Sonographic follow-up after pyeloplasty: a large, retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRoutine scintigraphy after surgery for uretero-pelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is discouraged, making ultrasound the preferred option for follow up. Yet, interpretation of sonographic parameters is rarely straightforward.
methodsWe reviewed 111 cases including 97 pyeloplasty (52 open, 45 laparoscopic) and 14 pyelopexy during a 7-year period. Pre- and postoperative pelvic antero-posterior diameter (APD), cortical thickness (CT) and pelvis/cortex ratio (PCR) was measured serially.
results85% were free of symptoms by 1 year. Only 11% had complete resolution of hydronephrosis. Eleven (10.4%) needed a redo procedure. Mean reduction in APD was 32.6%, 45.8%, and 51.7% at 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months respectively. CT increased by an average 55.9%, 75.6% and 107.6% while PCR reduced by 6.9, 8.0 and 8.8 at given intervals. Comparison of open and laparoscopic procedures showed no significant difference. Review of failed pyeloplasty showed failure of reduction in APD (APD > 3 cm or < 25% reduction) and PCR (PCR > 4) as early indicators for failure.
conclusionBoth APD and PCR are reliable indicators of success and failure following pyeloplasty while CT alone is not as useful. Laparoscopic procedures are non-inferior to standard open surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36808250What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.